Skip to content


Karuppanan Ambalam Vs. Ramasami Chetti - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1898)8MLJ165
AppellantKaruppanan Ambalam
RespondentRamasami Chetti
Cases ReferredDewany Roy v. Sundar Tewary
Excerpt:
- 1. the suit was to recover back money paid in excess of the amount due, under pressure. it was not a suit to recover compensation for illegal, improper or excessive distress or attachment within the meaning of article 35, clause j of the 2nd schedule of the provincial small cause court's act of 1887. this has been hold to apply only to cases where the suit is brought to recover damages for the tort, dewany roy v. sundar tewary, i. l. r., 24 c., 163 and not for many paid in. excess, and with this ruling we agree. the suit is therefore one cognizable by a court of small causes as the munsif held.
Judgment:

1. The suit was to recover back money paid in excess of the amount due, under pressure. It was not a suit to recover compensation for illegal, improper or excessive distress or attachment within the meaning of Article 35, Clause j of the 2nd Schedule of the Provincial Small Cause Court's Act of 1887. This has been hold to apply only to cases where the suit is brought to recover damages for the tort, Dewany Roy v. Sundar Tewary, I. L. R., 24 C., 163 and not for many paid in. excess, and with this ruling we agree. The suit is therefore one cognizable by a Court of Small Causes as the Munsif held.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //